Poor management and over-worked employees with low morale - Flood Underwriter Selective Insurance Employee Review

1.0
Sep 22, 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great benefits, Close to home for many employees living in the remote region

Cons

Many of the benefits and perks HR listed as available to me in on-boarding were non-existent. The department was barred from participating in Employee-Appreciation Day (says enough in and of itself), Volunteer Days, and when the rest of the company was released early before holidays, we were the ones left standing til the very end of the work day. Management was passive-aggressive, micro-managed, while upper-level management took extensive vacations, went to trade-shows across the country, and/or worked from home (not available to lower-level employees although we had the system capabilities) while the worker-bees struggled to complete work-loads that were unrealistic and unmanageable. High turn over rate and slow-to-hire for replacements, additional workloads were saddled onto remaining employees. Super low morale and an all-around negative atmosphere to come into work every day. Those employees who did manage to transfer out of the department to others within the company were given poor recommendations, despite high monthly performance in an attempt to keep them in the under-staffed Flood department.

Explore other reviews about Selective Insurance

5.0
Apr 17, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Strong but difficult leadership during transformation.

Cons

Relocation causing some some concern

2
1.0
May 26, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Decent benefits and decent coworkers

Cons

Working at Selective was a toxic work environment shaped by favoritism, excessive workload expectations, and poor boundaries around employee availability. Management often applied expectations unevenly, which created a lack of fairness and accountability. High performance did not always seem to be the primary factor in decision-making, which undermined trust in leadership. There was also a strong “big fish, small pond” dynamic, where internal status and informal influence often carried more weight than actual performance or collaboration. This contributed to a highly political environment where trust between colleagues was limited and information did not always feel safe to share openly. Employees were expected to be available far beyond normal working hours, creating an unsustainable “always on” culture with no real work-life balance. The workload was consistently too high for the compensation provided. Internal politics further interfered with day-to-day work and made collaboration more difficult than it needed to be. In practice, this environment often encouraged self-preservation over teamwork, which made it difficult to build trust or rely on others consistently. Overall, the environment was not structured in a way that supported long-term employee wellbeing or retention. This is not a workplace that supports a healthy work-life balance. For me, the experience felt unsustainable, and over time it became clear that the environment was not conducive to long-term growth or wellbeing.

2
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All